You know Nothing Jon Snow (Play-calling)

[T-RO]

"You know Nothing, Jon Snow" sounds warm and even sexy coming from the lips of GOT's Ygritte. But in the world of football forums the constant berating of "know-nothing" coaches and GMs can be as shrill as it is mindless.

The biggest aspect of football that the average fan loves to attack is play-calling. "He's not imaginative!" "He's too cute" "Just run the damn ball." "Open it up." "Get more aggressive"

What's particularly funny is when fans blame Jason Garrett--who neither designs the offense nor calls the plays. Our offensive coordinator is Scott Linehan so if you don't like the offense at least direct your venom in the right direction.

How has Linehan done? The ultimate test is points per drive. This is what the Boys on offense, under Linehan have achieved.

2016, 2.54 points per game (4th in all NFL)
2017, 2.59 points per game (1st in all NFL)

Despite featuring a tight end past his prime, a #1 receiver that can't separate and a talented but still maturing quarterback...the results are elite.

Maybe our Jon Snow OC knows a few things about calling plays.

 

[waving monkey]

God do I get on board with this.Particularly the unimaginative play calling.
I don't consider Linehan the top play caller in the NFL but he is certainly a top ten and i think better.
His done a masterful job of bringing Dak along and keeping ole reliable Witten schemed in.
Just thankful Cooper figured it out.

 

[TwoDeep3]

Too much of the complaining, especially in the OP's opening comments about the unsatisfied fan, meaning the fan and not the OP, is immediate results driven angst.

During the three Super Bowl runs in the 90's there were many low points when things were questioned by a lot of us fans on this site and the one which preceded it. Especially early when I considered Jimmy Johnson to be a poor clock management leader. But you forget those things when great success arrives.

Sometimes the other team makes a play and stops a well drawn up play by Dallas. Sometimes the Dallas players did not execute as planned. The factors that make poor results have many deadbeat fathers which makes these plays orphans.

However, if Garrett's only contribution is to benignly stand around clapping his hands and occasionally chastising a ref with his Golly Gee boy next door chagrin, then why is he here? To give these insight laced speeches in the post game pressers?

Jimmy Johnson tells a story of coming into the 1992 Super Bowl. He was watching the local news and when the sports came on they were doing the talking head out in front and the Bills practicing behind. Jimmy noticed the Bills were doing a shovel pass and during the sportscast they ran that play several times. He grabbed Wandstadt and asked him to look at this. He was quoted as saying he asked Wandstadt if he had seen this in any of the film they had on the Bills throughout the year. They had not. So Jimmy and Dave drew up plans to counter this play.

The Super Bowl comes along and Dallas is sitting on this play. Ken Norton stuffed this several times.

Now I truly don't know how much Garrett influences this team. So I am guilty of the misplaced frustration I assign to Garrett as illustrated by the OP. But having said that I submit this.

There is an article floating here about the Dallas Quarterbacks throughout the history of this team. One of the central themes to this article when discussing Landry was that he didn't smile a lot and was a stern task master. The term used by some of the quarterbacks, and other players who were on Landry's teams was intimidated.

There is no doubt Jimmy Johnson intimidated his players. But both of these coaches, regardless of circumstances had top flight quarterbacks, and assembled teams that won. and won it all.

I see Garrett with Romo as his centerpiece field general, and wonder why there is such a drought for this team in merely playing in an NFC Championship game. Now to be fair, Garrett is not completely at fault.

But I have never heard a GM tell the press his head coach was doing on the job training either.

I think Garrett is weak. I do not see him as a real disciplinarian. Someone who commands respect from his troops. Nor do I see him as a field marshal, directing his generals to success. I think of Bill Bilichick, who seems to be a very well liked coach by his players, yet is in total command. Perhaps Belichick could be describe as the Mad Scientist type. Which Garrett would never be labeled.

I submit the only true difference between Garrett's three 8-8 seasons and Dave Campo during his three 5-11 seasons is Garrett had a good quarterback and Campo had Do-Do..

Of course the grass is always greener, so what the heck do I know?

 

[visionary]

Too much of the complaining, especially in the OP's opening comments about the unsatisfied fan, meaning the fan and not the OP, is immediate results driven angst.

During the three Super Bowl runs in the 90's there were many low points when things were questioned by a lot of us fans on this site and the one which preceded it. Especially early when I considered Jimmy Johnson to be a poor clock management leader. But you forget those things when great success arrives.

Sometimes the other team makes a play and stops a well drawn up play by Dallas. Sometimes the Dallas players did not execute as planned. The factors that make poor results have many deadbeat fathers which makes these plays orphans.

However, if Garrett's only contribution is to benignly stand around clapping his hands and occasionally chastising a ref with his Golly Gee boy next door chagrin, then why is he here? To give these insight laced speeches in the post game pressers?

Jimmy Johnson tells a story of coming into the 1992 Super Bowl. He was watching the local news and when the sports came on they were doing the talking head out in front and the Bills practicing behind. Jimmy noticed the Bills were doing a shovel pass and during the sportscast they ran that play several times. He grabbed Wandstadt and asked him to look at this. He was quoted as saying he asked Wandstadt if he had seen this in any of the film they had on the Bills throughout the year. They had not. So Jimmy and Dave drew up plans to counter this play.

The Super Bowl comes along and Dallas is sitting on this play. Ken Norton stuffed this several times.

Now I truly don't know how much Garrett influences this team. So I am guilty of the misplaced frustration I assign to Garrett as illustrated by the OP. But having said that I submit this.

There is an article floating here about the Dallas Quarterbacks throughout the history of this team. One of the central themes to this article when discussing Landry was that he didn't smile a lot and was a stern task master. The term used by some of the quarterbacks, and other players who were on Landry's teams was intimidated.

There is no doubt Jimmy Johnson intimidated his players. But both of these coaches, regardless of circumstances had top flight quarterbacks, and assembled teams that won. and won it all.

I see Garrett with Romo as his centerpiece field general, and wonder why there is such a drought for this team in merely playing in an NFC Championship game. Now to be fair, Garrett is not completely at fault.

But I have never heard a GM tell the press his head coach was doing on the job training either.

I think Garrett is weak. I do not see him as a real disciplinarian. Someone who commands respect from his troops. Nor do I see him as a field marshal, directing his generals to success. I think of Bill Bilichick, who seems to be a very well liked coach by his players, yet is in total command. Perhaps Belichick could be describe as the Mad Scientist type. Which Garrett would never be labeled.

I submit the only true difference between Garrett's three 8-8 seasons and Dave Campo during his three 5-11 seasons is Garrett had a good quarterback and Campo had Do-Do..

Of course the grass is always greener, so what the heck do I know?

Agree with everything you said

Garrett is actually worse than Campo because at least with Campo you know you don't have a real HC, just a pet poodle. Garrett gives you the illusion of a real HC while adding nothing of substance and this is why Jerry is "comfortable " with his yes man

 

[TheCount]

Now I truly don't know how much Garrett influences this team. So I am guilty of the misplaced frustration I assign to Garrett as illustrated by the OP. But having said that I submit this.

No one knows what he does.

He's not the face of it, Jerry has that covered – for better or worse.
He's not the offensive architect.
He's not the defensive architect.
He's not the talent acquirer – either in FA or the draft.
He's not keeping guys on the straight and narrow.
He's not a masterful game manager.
He's not making that one adjustment no one saw coming.

His only job appears to be as boring and unerringly on-message as possible, so that at least the perception is the ringleader of the circus isn't a part of it himself.

One thing you haven't heard in all his time here? The GM and the head coach disagree fundamentally on any aspect of the team, which is a wonder considering how hands-on the GM is.

 

[waving monkey]

Too much of the complaining, especially in the OP's opening comments about the unsatisfied fan, meaning the fan and not the OP, is immediate results driven angst.

During the three Super Bowl runs in the 90's there were many low points when things were questioned by a lot of us fans on this site and the one which preceded it. Especially early when I considered Jimmy Johnson to be a poor clock management leader. But you forget those things when great success arrives.

Sometimes the other team makes a play and stops a well drawn up play by Dallas. Sometimes the Dallas players did not execute as planned. The factors that make poor results have many deadbeat fathers which makes these plays orphans.

However, if Garrett's only contribution is to benignly stand around clapping his hands and occasionally chastising a ref with his Golly Gee boy next door chagrin, then why is he here? To give these insight laced speeches in the post game pressers?

Jimmy Johnson tells a story of coming into the 1992 Super Bowl. He was watching the local news and when the sports came on they were doing the talking head out in front and the Bills practicing behind. Jimmy noticed the Bills were doing a shovel pass and during the sportscast they ran that play several times. He grabbed Wandstadt and asked him to look at this. He was quoted as saying he asked Wandstadt if he had seen this in any of the film they had on the Bills throughout the year. They had not. So Jimmy and Dave drew up plans to counter this play.

The Super Bowl comes along and Dallas is sitting on this play. Ken Norton stuffed this several times.

Now I truly don't know how much Garrett influences this team. So I am guilty of the misplaced frustration I assign to Garrett as illustrated by the OP. But having said that I submit this.

There is an article floating here about the Dallas Quarterbacks throughout the history of this team. One of the central themes to this article when discussing Landry was that he didn't smile a lot and was a stern task master. The term used by some of the quarterbacks, and other players who were on Landry's teams was intimidated.

There is no doubt Jimmy Johnson intimidated his players. But both of these coaches, regardless of circumstances had top flight quarterbacks, and assembled teams that won. and won it all.

I see Garrett with Romo as his centerpiece field general, and wonder why there is such a drought for this team in merely playing in an NFC Championship game. Now to be fair, Garrett is not completely at fault.

But I have never heard a GM tell the press his head coach was doing on the job training either.

I think Garrett is weak. I do not see him as a real disciplinarian. Someone who commands respect from his troops. Nor do I see him as a field marshal, directing his generals to success. I think of Bill Bilichick, who seems to be a very well liked coach by his players, yet is in total command. Perhaps Belichick could be describe as the Mad Scientist type. Which Garrett would never be labeled.

I submit the only true difference between Garrett's three 8-8 seasons and Dave Campo during his three 5-11 seasons is Garrett had a good quarterback and Campo had Do-Do..

Of course the grass is always greener, so what the heck do I know?

I was waiting for this and you finally articulated it. "

I think Garrett is weak. I do not see him as a real disciplinarian. Someone who commands respect from his troops. Nor do I see him as a field marshal, directing his generals to success. I think of Bill Bilichick, who seems to be a very well liked coach by his players, yet is in total command. Perhaps Belichick could be describe as the Mad Scientist type. Which Garrett would never be labeled.

I admire your post and always have but we see things differently. The people that know Garrett say quit the opposite.
One of those is Troy who knows him well.
There are so many ways to lead and old school is but one of them. Everywhere Garrett went before JJOnes grabbed him back to the Cowboys people tried to keep him.
Baltimore offered him the head coach job.
It puzzles me to no end but whats new.

 

[Kalyan]

Garrett is middle if the pack coach, who beats up bad teams and gets beaten up by good coaches and good teams, that is why he us a career 8-8 coach who will not win a sb in his career. But he knows to do enough to keep JJ happy and save his job

 

[Sydla]

I was waiting for this and you finally articulated it. "

I think Garrett is weak. I do not see him as a real disciplinarian. Someone who commands respect from his troops. Nor do I see him as a field marshal, directing his generals to success. I think of Bill Bilichick, who seems to be a very well liked coach by his players, yet is in total command. Perhaps Belichick could be describe as the Mad Scientist type. Which Garrett would never be labeled.

I admire your post and always have but we see things differently. The people that know Garrett say quit the opposite.
One of those is Troy who knows him well.
There are so many ways to lead and old school is but one of them. Everywhere Garrett went before JJOnes grabbed him back to the Cowboys people tried to keep him.
Baltimore offered him the head coach job.
It puzzles me to no end but whats new.

Everywhere he's been? Garrett had one coaching gig before Dallas. Miami. That's it.

You make it sound like he's multiple jobs with multiple NFL teams.

And what Baltimore wanted to do in 2008 is pretty meaningless at this point.

 

[MileyDancer]

I think Garrett is weak. I do not see him as a real disciplinarian. Someone who commands respect from his troops.

He is weak. I've heard several stories about players constantly breaking his rules (like curfew) during TC, and he does nothing about it because the players know he won't. There are also several FO people that can't stand him.

 

[waving monkey]

He is weak. I've heard several stories about players constantly breaking his rules (like curfew) during TC, and he does nothing about it because the players know he won't. There are also several FO people that can't stand him.

well the one that counts loves him

 

[ElGatoGrande]

"You know Nothing, Jon Snow" sounds warm and even sexy coming from the lips of GOT's Ygritte. But in the world of football forums the constant berating of "know-nothing" coaches and GMs can be as shrill as it is mindless.

The biggest aspect of football that the average fan loves to attack is play-calling. "He's not imaginative!" "He's too cute" "Just run the damn ball." "Open it up." "Get more aggressive"

What's particularly funny is when fans blame Jason Garrett--who neither designs the offense nor calls the plays. Our offensive coordinator is Scott Linehan so if you don't like the offense at least direct your venom in the right direction.

How has Linehan done? The ultimate test is points per drive. This is what the Boys on offense, under Linehan have achieved.

2016, 2.54 points per game (4th in all NFL)
2017, 2.59 points per game (1st in all NFL)

Despite featuring a tight end past his prime, a #1 receiver that can't separate and a talented but still maturing quarterback...the results are elite.

Maybe our Jon Snow OC knows a few things about calling plays.

Good points. I think the staff is underappreciated. Rebuilding through the draft and bargain bin free agency is frustratingly slow and a debatable philosophy to hold, but that frustration shouldn't stop us from recognizing the good work that has been put into getting us this far.

 

[CowboyRoy]

"You know Nothing, Jon Snow" sounds warm and even sexy coming from the lips of GOT's Ygritte. But in the world of football forums the constant berating of "know-nothing" coaches and GMs can be as shrill as it is mindless.

The biggest aspect of football that the average fan loves to attack is play-calling. "He's not imaginative!" "He's too cute" "Just run the damn ball." "Open it up." "Get more aggressive"

What's particularly funny is when fans blame Jason Garrett--who neither designs the offense nor calls the plays. Our offensive coordinator is Scott Linehan so if you don't like the offense at least direct your venom in the right direction.

How has Linehan done? The ultimate test is points per drive. This is what the Boys on offense, under Linehan have achieved.

2016, 2.54 points per game (4th in all NFL)
2017, 2.59 points per game (1st in all NFL)

Despite featuring a tight end past his prime, a #1 receiver that can't separate and a talented but still maturing quarterback...the results are elite.

Maybe our Jon Snow OC knows a few things about calling plays.

So you are basically saying that Garrett doesnt do much here. He certainly doesnt do anything with the defense and we know other people handle the draft, FA and the roster. So other than clapping, patting fannies, press conferences, and some other little things, what exactly does Garrett do here?

So to some degree I agree with you. Garrett shouldnt get the blame for certain things like play calling. But we all know game management/clock management he does and he does horribly.

And on the other side of the coin its just as foolish for many of us to hear from guys like you that Garrett deserves all the credit. Cant have it both ways.

 

[DC Cowboy]

"You know Nothing, Jon Snow" sounds warm and even sexy coming from the lips of GOT's Ygritte. But in the world of football forums the constant berating of "know-nothing" coaches and GMs can be as shrill as it is mindless.

The biggest aspect of football that the average fan loves to attack is play-calling. "He's not imaginative!" "He's too cute" "Just run the damn ball." "Open it up." "Get more aggressive"

What's particularly funny is when fans blame Jason Garrett--who neither designs the offense nor calls the plays. Our offensive coordinator is Scott Linehan so if you don't like the offense at least direct your venom in the right direction.

How has Linehan done? The ultimate test is points per drive. This is what the Boys on offense, under Linehan have achieved.

2016, 2.54 points per game (4th in all NFL)
2017, 2.59 points per game (1st in all NFL)

Despite featuring a tight end past his prime, a #1 receiver that can't separate and a talented but still maturing quarterback...the results are elite.

Maybe our Jon Snow OC knows a few things about calling plays.

What about opposing defenders that declare our offense is simple and not imaginative? Now I get it, even if you know it's coming and can't stop it then it doesn't matter BUT what happens when we play teams that can stop our "basic" offense. Does our coaching staff have the imagination/schemes/adjustments to off set the other teams efforts?

 

[T-RO]

And on the other side of the coin its just as foolish for many of us to hear from guys like you that Garrett deserves all the credit. Cant have it both ways.

Here is what I've said *many times* about Garrett: "I don't know what he does."

But that's a reflection of the head coaching job description in Dallas in recent years more than a slam on Jason. Jerry doesn't give Jason much to do. Decide to go on 4th down or punt...drop the red flag on a dispute...address the team. Some draft input, but probably not a lot...

For many years I slammed Jerry about undercutting the head coaches here...but I've come to understand it won't change and Jerry will probably outlive all of us.

I find it funny that Linehan's offense -- the #1 offense in the NFL...gets so little credit here...

 

[TrailBlazer]

"You know Nothing, Jon Snow" sounds warm and even sexy coming from the lips of GOT's Ygritte. But in the world of football forums the constant berating of "know-nothing" coaches and GMs can be as shrill as it is mindless.

The biggest aspect of football that the average fan loves to attack is play-calling. "He's not imaginative!" "He's too cute" "Just run the damn ball." "Open it up." "Get more aggressive"

What's particularly funny is when fans blame Jason Garrett--who neither designs the offense nor calls the plays. Our offensive coordinator is Scott Linehan so if you don't like the offense at least direct your venom in the right direction.

How has Linehan done? The ultimate test is points per drive. This is what the Boys on offense, under Linehan have achieved.

2016, 2.54 points per game (4th in all NFL)
2017, 2.59 points per game (1st in all NFL)

Despite featuring a tight end past his prime, a #1 receiver that can't separate and a talented but still maturing quarterback...the results are elite.

Maybe our Jon Snow OC knows a few things about calling plays.

Jason Garrett is the Head coach, therefore the success or failure is on him. Not just his assistants. We should be elite offensively, were stacked at every position. When you only take into account the past season and a half, it makes it seem as though you are just cherry picking to fit your narrative. Whats more impressive, is how good the defense has been, with a bunch of scrubs.

 

[Chuck 54]

Most coaches in the NFL are very good coaches; that's how they got there. Some are poor head coaches because they can't handle the responsibility or relate to players beyond the positional coaching...no big picture.

However, bottom line is that players play and win the games, not the coaches or their schemes.

Landry was a great coach with great players; he couldn't win games without his stars.
Johnson was a great coach once he had a team of stars (he put together), but he sucked in Miami.
Lombardi was great in GB with Bart Star and other stars; he was a loser in Washington.
Parcells was a beast in NY, and while he improved the Cowboys, it wasn't with his coaching or schemes which couldn't succeed with inferior players.

The list is endless. The great coaches are still great coaches, but they can't win games with average players or with great players who have average performances in big games. Garrett has grown into his role as overseer, motivator, and game manager. He's good enough if this team finishes building the defense without letting the offense stumble. Players win games and championships. If you don't believe this, check back in a few years after Tom Brady retires. Coach Hoodie will still be a great coach, but it won't be the same.

 

[Chuck 54]

Jason Garrett is the Head coach, therefore the success or failure is on him. Not just his assistants. We should be elite offensively, were stacked at every position. When you only take into account the past season and a half, it makes it seem as though you are just cherry picking to fit your narrative. Whats more impressive, is how good the defense has been, with a bunch of scrubs.

I'd question the "stacked at every position." We don't have an elite receiver at any spot. Dez is pretty good in the red zone, but he's not a dependable go-to receiver...too easy to take out of the game by an elite CB or double team; Williams is a good blocker, but he brings nothing to the table that anyone would consider top half of the league; Beasley had a great year and is now showing that teams can bracket him and take him out of the game; Witten is the old pro who shows up now and then but isn't a top threat at TE. You can't have everything on offense, but I'd love to see Dak with some serious weapons.

 

[Sydla]

Most coaches in the NFL are very good coaches; that's how they got there. Some are poor head coaches because they can't handle the responsibility or relate to players beyond the positional coaching...no big picture.

However, bottom line is that players play and win the games, not the coaches or their schemes.

Landry was a great coach with great players; he couldn't win games without his stars.
Johnson was a great coach once he had a team of stars (he put together), but he sucked in Miami.
Lombardi was great in GB with Bart Star and other stars; he was a loser in Washington.
Parcells was a beast in NY, and while he improved the Cowboys, it wasn't with his coaching or schemes which couldn't succeed with inferior players.

The list is endless. The great coaches are still great coaches, but they can't win games with average players or with great players who have average performances in big games. Garrett has grown into his role as overseer, motivator, and game manager. He's good enough if this team finishes building the defense without letting the offense stumble. Players win games and championships. If you don't believe this, check back in a few years after Tom Brady retires. Coach Hoodie will still be a great coach, but it won't be the same.

I want a coach that makes the team look better. Not the team that has to make the coach look better.

I fear we have the latter.

 

[TrailBlazer]

I'd question the "stacked at every position." We don't have an elite receiver at any spot. Dez is pretty good in the red zone, but he's not a dependable go-to receiver...too easy to take out of the game by an elite CB or double team; Williams is a good blocker, but he brings nothing to the table that anyone would consider top half of the league; Beasley had a great year and is now showing that teams can bracket him and take him out of the game; Witten is the old pro who shows up now and then but isn't a top threat at TE. You can't have everything on offense, but I'd love to see Dak with some serious weapons.

Our receiving corp is top 10 in the league. Not that receivers win games in this league. Stacked oline and running game. Every bit of resources is in this offense. That's why our defensive performance is so much better, because of the clear lack of resources put into it.

 

[T-RO]

Dallas is 17-6 since the beginning of last season.

The offense was ranked #4 last year and #1 this year. In the one playoff game during that span the offense piled up 429 yards and 31 points.

It is just inconceivable that anyone would have anything but praise for what the coaches and players on that side of the ball have done. Credit also must go to those in the draft department and front office for building that part of the team.

The special teams are also generally good. Our field goal kicker and punter are stout. We haven't allowed much in returns.

Obviously the defense has held us back...but there are some hopeful signs. The #1 problem was our pass rush and that's dramatically improved. Attention is still needed to upgrade 3 positions. If Awuzie can get healthy....maybe he can address one of those spots.